Senior Project: The Legality of Self-Defense

[Kieran-Lilith]

Not sure where to put this, but I figured at least some people would look here.

In my high school, every senior completes a Senior Project. We pick the topic, and I have decided to do the legality of self defense. In most states, self defense is legal, but if you win, you become the aggressor in a fight, and thus it becomes illegal. Does this make sense? Not really.

Does anyone know of court cases, possible links, etc? Anything would be helpful, and all help is much appreciated.

Arigato,

KL

[bushido_man96]

I would start by interviewing some local law enforcement officers on how they view fighting in general. What they see when they arrive, how they approach the fighters, interview processes, etc.

Then, I would ask some attorneys questions involved with defending someone who defended themselves.

Understanding the use-of-force ladder will also be handy for your paper, as well.

As for cases on the subject; I am of no help there. Talking to some attorneys may help you to find some, though. Good luck with your paper!

[Lephisto]

Not sure where to put this, but I figured at least some people would look here.

In my high school, every senior completes a Senior Project. We pick the topic, and I have decided to do the legality of self defense. In most states, self defense is legal, but if you win, you become the aggressor in a fight, and thus it becomes illegal. Does this make sense? Not really.

Does anyone know of court cases, possible links, etc? Anything would be helpful, and all help is much appreciated.

Arigato,

KL

That is very stupid if you win and considered the aggressor, the whole point of martial arts is to defend yourself. What the government is pretty much saying is "you can learn to defend but you still have to lose the fight"

IMO the law for self defense is stupid.

[bushido_man96]

That is very stupid if you win and considered the aggressor, the whole point of martial arts is to defend yourself. What the government is pretty much saying is "you can learn to defend but you still have to lose the fight"

IMO the law for self defense is stupid.

This is not really the case. Lets say you get into a fight. If you defend yourself successfully, and the cops show up, and you are not the aggressor, and have witness to prove it, then you should be ok. However, if you defend yourself, take the guy down, get on top, and then begin to slug away at him on his back, then when the cops show up, you look like the aggressor. Then problems arise.

[gamedweeb]

I guess it comes down to what the difference is between fighting and defending yourself. If you're concerned with defending yourself, you'll leave at the earliest possible point. Where as a fight is more ego based, you stay until the other guy is beaten into submission.

Yet I can't help but wonder why the law seems to be on the side of the attacker that fails. He took a chance and attacked the wrong person.

[bushido_man96]

Yet I can't help but wonder why the law seems to be on the side of the attacker that fails. He took a chance and attacked the wrong person.

I don't quite understand what you mean here. Could you elaborate further?

[gamedweeb]

There's a local instructor I know of that tells his students: "If you're contronted by someone knife and have to disarm them, break the finger, not the hand."

This instructor ended up having to pay damages to the attacker because he broke the guys hand. How messed up is that? He could've been stabbed to death and yet only broke the guys hand.

Then there's the possiblity of being attacked by someone that's "a different race." You defend yourself, and then are put on trial for a hate crime.

Or you could be a little old lady that keeps a gun in your night stand. You wake up and hear someone in your in your house. You get up with your gun and flashlight and go see what's going on. There's someone snooping around that should be there, you feel threatened so you shoot them. Then you find yourself put on trial being asked "How do you know he intended to hurt you?" (yes this was a real case, I believe it was in Florida)

Or the cynical joke: "If you end up killing someone in your house while defending yourself and they fall through a window and end up on the lawn. Bring them back in the house, then call the cops."

I'm sure those are rarities. But in some of the reading I've done lawyers have pointed out that it's not difficult for a would be assailant turned test dummy to turn the situation around so that they're the victim.

In retrospect Bushido my comment was probably pretty sweeping and over exagerated... But in our world of Twinkie Defenses you never know.

[bushido_man96]

I see what you are saying now. There are always some things that can come up in cases like that. It is very important to have a good attorney, and to be able to articulate what happened, that you felt threatened, and why things transpired the way that they did.

If you say that you "broke his hand because he had a knife," that can sound funky to a jury. But, if you say "I was attempting to control the knife weilding hand of the attacker, and in the process of the struggle, he injured his hand," sounds much less intentional to a jury.

Just food for thought.

It is also important to be familiar with the use-of-force continuum for the area that you live in (city, state, etc.). It does vary from place to place. Some states also have a "stand and defend" law regarding break in and the like; I think ours in KS just got repealed. Sun Tzu said to "know the enemy" and to "know yourself" in order to be successful in battle. We just as well add in "and know the laws" as well.

[dineshm]

Dont talk until your lawyer gets there.

[gamedweeb]

Very good point about being able to articulate what happened Bushido. There was another article I read on using the term "headlock" vs. "choke hold." If you tell an arriving officer that the assailant that he had you in a "headlock" and you beat the crap out of him to get away, chances are you'll end up in handcuffs. Whereas if you were to tell the officer that he put you into a "choke hold" then it implies impending loss of consciousness and possibly death.

I also like that "I was attempting to control the knife wielding hand of the attacker, and in the process of the struggle, he injured his hand."